Institutional Spheres: The Macro-Structure and Culture of Social Life

Abrutyn, Seth

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-32250-6_11

Cited by 30 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We claim that it is important to consider on theoretical level not just isolated norms related to negative side effects for some actors involved but rather institutional domains (spheres) as distinct multilayered physical, temporal, social, and symbolic sites of interaction. These domains shape norms and, more generally, life-worlds of individual and collective actors (Abrutyn, 2013(Abrutyn, , 2016. The complex of normative expectations defines not only an individual's role during interaction but also other reciprocally related roles, for example, "doctor-patient" or, in our case, "tortfeasor-victimarbitrator" (Parsons, 1951).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Causality and Blame Judgments of Negative Side Effects of Actions May Differ for Different Institutional Domains

Девятко

Gavrilov

2020

Sage Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive factors are known to influence lay assessments of causality and blame for negative side effects of intentional actions but specific social determinants of such assessments remain relatively unexplored. In a full-factorial, intraindividual experiment using two blocks of analogous vignettes constructed for two particular institutional action domains (“medical” and “corporate dress code”), we tested the propositions that causality and blame judgments differ between (a) domains and depend on (b) the type of action originator; (c) the type of damage; and (d) the “remoteness” of damage from the originator. Our data demonstrate a significant difference between two institutional action domains: actors in “medical”-related vignettes are generally estimated to be more causally effective and blameworthy than actors in “dress code”–related vignettes. In addition to the pronounced main effects of institutional domain as a factor influencing cause and blame judgments, we revealed few significant interaction effects of the latter with other experimental factors used for vignettes construction.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Causality and Blame Judgments of Negative Side Effects of Actions May Differ for Different Institutional Domains

Девятко

Gavrilov

2020

Sage Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We base our empirical analysis on the Content Analysis methodology (Stemler, 2015). In accordance with academic literature, the methodological technique of Content Analysis represents a valid tool for applying a rigorous investigation of descriptive statistics, applied to textual, visual or audio data (Scott & Kosslyn, 2015;Abrutyn, 2016;Lewis-Beck et al, 2003). Indeed, content inquiry encompasses a broad range of methodologies, both manual and automated (through the use of powerful statistical software), focused on the contextual interpretation of materials originating from communicative activities.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and His Future Application Scenario for Italian SMEs

Celli,

Arduini,

Beck

2024

IJBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to outline the salient points of CSRD (2022/2464/EU Directive) and reflect on its application for smaller enterprises, which typically have fewer resources than their listed counterparts. For these small entities the challenge of sustainability turns out to be more impactful and complex, potentially constituting an “information tsunami” for which they may find themselves completely unprepared. The theoretical framework underpinning this paper is overload theory. This theory, also linked to the economic and accounting background, is deeply rooted in the international academic literature as a “hot topic”, which suggests that processes may lead to increased cognitive overload due to excessive information volume. To test our hypothesis about the potentially overwhelming burden of environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting for small-medium enterprises (SMEs), we decided to observe how Italian ones use and manage the Sustainability Reporting (SR) as a voluntary tool. For this purpose, we carried out an empirical study related to a descriptive statistic based on a sample of 72 innovative Italian SMEs. To apply the utmost scientific rigor to our judgments, in accordance with the extensive literature reviewed, including in the field of accounting, we have based our empirical study on the established methodological technique of Content Analysis.

show abstract

“…Despite prior research, empirical evidence from research of the institutions at the societal level is still insufficient, and many important, and many specific issues remain unclear here. For instance, it is still unclear that, given different levels of gender‐related institutional environments/logics in a country/society, what may be the gender heterogeneity in persons' pro‐environmental or other prosocial behaviors (Abrutyn, 2016; Kraatz & Block, 2008).…”

Section: Conceptual Background and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender‐related institutional environments, gender pay gap/equality and prosocial behaviors: A cross‐national meta‐analysis

Li,

Liu,

Dong

et al. 2024

Corp Soc Responsibility Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We adopt a meta‐analytic approach to study the relationship between gender‐related institutional environments/logics at both organizational level and societal level on the one hand and gender heterogeneities in individual prosocial behaviors on the other. Analyzing data from 138 empirical studies covering 35 countries, we obtain evidence of gender heterogeneity in prosocial behaviors under different gender‐related institutional environments/logics. Our meta‐analysis helps obtain several important findings. For instance, a gender gap in pro‐environmental behaviors is more likely to be observed in societies/countries with low gender egalitarianism with women showing less prosocial behavior than their men counterparts. Moreover, women under the same institutional environments also show significantly more anti‐corruption behaviors than do their men counterparts, while this difference is much smaller (i.e., with smaller effect size) given the institutions of high gender egalitarianism. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of the findings for academic research and managerial practice.

show abstract

Institutional Spheres: The Macro-Structure and Culture of Social Life

Cited by 30 publications

References 57 publications

Causality and Blame Judgments of Negative Side Effects of Actions May Differ for Different Institutional Domains

Causality and Blame Judgments of Negative Side Effects of Actions May Differ for Different Institutional Domains

Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and His Future Application Scenario for Italian SMEs

Gender‐related institutional environments, gender pay gap/equality and prosocial behaviors: A cross‐national meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About